To Kill a Mockingbird: A Closing Argument
Inquiry Framework
Question Framework
Driving Question
The overarching question that guides the entire project.In the context of racial injustice in the 1930s, how can we, as lawyers for Tom Robinson, construct a closing argument that persuades a jury to look beyond their biases and deliver true justice?Essential Questions
Supporting questions that break down major concepts.- How does understanding character motivations and biases influence the construction of a persuasive argument?
- What are the key elements of an effective closing argument, and how can they be used to sway a jury?
- How does the historical and social context of the novel impact the themes of justice and prejudice, and how can this be conveyed in a closing argument?
- How can literary devices and rhetorical strategies be employed to enhance the emotional impact and persuasiveness of a closing argument?
Standards & Learning Goals
Learning Goals
By the end of this project, students will be able to:- Students will analyze character motivations and biases in To Kill a Mockingbird to inform their arguments.
- Students will construct and deliver a persuasive closing argument, incorporating rhetorical strategies and literary devices.
- Students will demonstrate an understanding of the historical and social context of racial injustice in the 1930s and its impact on the themes of justice and prejudice in the novel.
- Students will evaluate the effectiveness of different persuasive techniques in swaying an audience.
- Students will collaborate effectively in teams to develop and refine their closing arguments.
- Students will apply their understanding of legal concepts and courtroom procedures to create a realistic closing argument for the defense.
Entry Events
Events that will be used to introduce the project to studentsClosing Argument Analysis
Present students with audio recordings of powerful closing arguments from famous court cases (e.g., Scottsboro Boys trial, Rodney King trial). Ask students to analyze the techniques used and discuss how these strategies could be applied to Tom Robinson's defense, sparking critical thinking about effective advocacy.Portfolio Activities
Portfolio Activities
These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.Bias Breakdown: Character Analysis Chart
Students will dissect key scenes and dialogues from 'To Kill a Mockingbird' to identify instances of racial bias and understand the motivations of characters involved in Tom Robinson's trial.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA detailed character analysis chart, including direct quotes and scene summaries, highlighting biases and motivations related to the trial.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with learning goals: Students will analyze character motivations and biases in To Kill a Mockingbird to inform their arguments; Students will demonstrate an understanding of the historical and social context of racial injustice in the 1930s and its impact on the themes of justice and prejudice in the novel.Rhetorical Toolkit: Persuasion Power-Up
Students will learn about various rhetorical devices (e.g., ethos, pathos, logos, anaphora) and legal persuasive techniques, selecting those most effective for Tom Robinson's defense.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA curated list of rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques with examples from famous closing arguments and explanations of their potential impact on the jury in 'To Kill a Mockingbird'.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with learning goals: Students will construct and deliver a persuasive closing argument, incorporating rhetorical strategies and literary devices; Students will evaluate the effectiveness of different persuasive techniques in swaying an audience.Justice Draft: Crafting the Closing Argument
Working in teams, students will draft a comprehensive closing argument for Tom Robinson, integrating character analysis, rhetorical devices, and persuasive techniques learned in previous activities.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA fully written closing argument, structured to build a compelling narrative, address key evidence, and appeal to the jury's sense of justice.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with learning goals: Students will construct and deliver a persuasive closing argument, incorporating rhetorical strategies and literary devices; Students will apply their understanding of legal concepts and courtroom procedures to create a realistic closing argument for the defense; Students will collaborate effectively in teams to develop and refine their closing arguments.The Verdict: Mock Trial & Reflection
Each team will present their closing argument in a mock trial setting, receiving constructive feedback from peers and the teacher on delivery, persuasiveness, and effectiveness.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA recorded mock trial presentation, along with a written self-reflection on the team's performance, incorporating feedback received and identifying areas for improvement.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with learning goals: Students will construct and deliver a persuasive closing argument, incorporating rhetorical strategies and literary devices; Students will evaluate the effectiveness of different persuasive techniques in swaying an audience; Students will collaborate effectively in teams to develop and refine their closing arguments.Rubric & Reflection
Portfolio Rubric
Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolioTo Kill a Mockingbird: Closing Argument Rubric
Analysis and Technique
Focuses on the depth of character analysis related to bias and the effective selection and justification of rhetorical devices.Character Analysis Depth
Accuracy and depth of character analysis, focusing on motivations, biases, and impact on the trial.
Exemplary
4 PointsDemonstrates sophisticated understanding of character motivations and biases, providing insightful analysis and comprehensive evidence from the text. Shows exceptional critical thinking in evaluating the characters' roles in perpetuating or challenging prejudice.
Proficient
3 PointsDemonstrates thorough understanding of character motivations and biases, providing clear analysis and relevant evidence from the text. Shows effective critical thinking in evaluating the characters' roles in the trial.
Developing
2 PointsShows emerging understanding of character motivations and biases, providing basic analysis and limited evidence from the text. Demonstrates some critical thinking in evaluating the characters' roles in the trial.
Beginning
1 PointsShows initial understanding of character motivations and biases, providing minimal analysis and insufficient evidence from the text. Demonstrates minimal critical thinking in evaluating the characters' roles in the trial.
Rhetorical Device Justification
Selection and justification of rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques appropriate for the closing argument.
Exemplary
4 PointsSelects and justifies rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques with exceptional insight, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of their potential impact on the jury. Provides innovative examples from famous closing arguments and explains their relevance to Tom Robinson's case in a comprehensive manner.
Proficient
3 PointsSelects and justifies rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques effectively, demonstrating a thorough understanding of their potential impact on the jury. Provides clear examples from famous closing arguments and explains their relevance to Tom Robinson's case.
Developing
2 PointsSelects rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques with some justification, demonstrating a basic understanding of their potential impact on the jury. Provides limited examples from famous closing arguments and explains their relevance to Tom Robinson's case.
Beginning
1 PointsSelects rhetorical devices and persuasive techniques with minimal justification, demonstrating an initial understanding of their potential impact on the jury. Provides insufficient examples from famous closing arguments and struggles to explain their relevance to Tom Robinson's case.
Argument Delivery & Reflection
Evaluates the structure and delivery of the argument, along with the quality of self-reflection on team performance.Argument Construction
Structure, clarity, and coherence of the closing argument, including logical flow and compelling narrative.
Exemplary
4 PointsCrafts a closing argument with exceptional structure, clarity, and coherence, creating a compelling and seamless narrative that builds logically and persuasively. Demonstrates sophisticated control of language and argument construction.
Proficient
3 PointsCrafts a closing argument with effective structure, clarity, and coherence, creating a logical and persuasive narrative. Demonstrates clear control of language and argument construction.
Developing
2 PointsCrafts a closing argument with some structure, clarity, and coherence, creating a partially logical and persuasive narrative. Demonstrates basic control of language and argument construction.
Beginning
1 PointsCrafts a closing argument with minimal structure, clarity, and coherence, creating a disjointed and unpersuasive narrative. Demonstrates limited control of language and argument construction.
Presentation & Persuasion
Delivery, persuasiveness, and overall effectiveness of the closing argument in a mock trial setting.
Exemplary
4 PointsDelivers the closing argument with exceptional poise, confidence, and persuasiveness, demonstrating outstanding command of the material and engaging the audience effectively. Demonstrates innovative use of presentation techniques to enhance the argument's impact.
Proficient
3 PointsDelivers the closing argument with effective poise, confidence, and persuasiveness, demonstrating clear command of the material and engaging the audience. Demonstrates skillful use of presentation techniques.
Developing
2 PointsDelivers the closing argument with some poise, confidence, and persuasiveness, demonstrating basic command of the material and engaging the audience to some extent. Demonstrates limited use of presentation techniques.
Beginning
1 PointsDelivers the closing argument with minimal poise, confidence, and persuasiveness, demonstrating limited command of the material and struggling to engage the audience. Demonstrates insufficient use of presentation techniques.
Self-Reflection Quality
Depth and insightfulness of self-reflection, identifying areas for improvement and incorporating feedback effectively.
Exemplary
4 PointsProvides a self-reflection that is exceptionally insightful, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of the team's performance and identifying specific, actionable areas for improvement. Innovatively incorporates feedback to propose targeted strategies for future growth.
Proficient
3 PointsProvides a self-reflection that is thorough and insightful, demonstrating a clear understanding of the team's performance and identifying specific areas for improvement. Effectively incorporates feedback to propose strategies for future growth.
Developing
2 PointsProvides a self-reflection that is basic and somewhat insightful, demonstrating some understanding of the team's performance and identifying general areas for improvement. Partially incorporates feedback to propose limited strategies for future growth.
Beginning
1 PointsProvides a self-reflection that is minimal and lacks insight, demonstrating limited understanding of the team's performance and struggling to identify areas for improvement. Insufficiently incorporates feedback and proposes few strategies for future growth.